I'm not clear in my mind what over-voting is – Afari Gyan

Crucial witness for the second respondent and Electoral Commissioner, Dr. Afari Gyan, has said in court, he is unsure of what over-voting really is.

Dr. Afari Gyan was continuing his testimony in the election petition hearing at the Supreme Court. He is being led by his counsel Quarshie Idun.


The court has heard about two definitions of over-voting.


One provided by the petitioners and one provided by the witness for the National Democratic Congress (NDC) and President Mahama, Johnson Asiedu Nketia.


First definition: Over-voting occurs when the number of votes cast exceeds the number of registered voters.


Second definition: Over-voting occurs when the number of votes cast exceeds the number of ballots issued to voters.


The petitioners have used the second definition while the respondents have used the first definition.

But in attempting to point out which definition was valid, Dr. Afari Gyan has said he was not sure which definition was the best.


“I am not clear in my mind what overvoting is,” Afari Gyan said.


But “you are the boss”? A hapless Justice Paul Baffoe Bonnie queried helplessly.


Dr. Afari Gyan went on to back the definition provided by the respondents and challenged the definition supplied by the petitioners. He said their definition was based solely on the pink sheet.


“My Lord I have a problem with any definition which limits over-voting exclusively to what is on the face of the pink sheet."


He said over-voting is not determined using pink sheets but by using the biometric verification machine. Afari-Gyan then offered what he said is the “classical definition of over voting”.

It is “where ballots cast exceed the number of voters eligible to vote at the polling stations or on the biometric register” he said.


But Justice Paul Baffoe Bonnie disagreed, he said in principle, it was not possible for a polling station to record 100% turn out.


A voter may be dead or simply unavailable to vote, he explained.


Dr. Afari Gyan, however, insisted that for now, he was sticking to his “classical definition”.